Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uncontrolled AI procreation?
Haha. A plot point for Ghost in the Shell (1998).
Did you mean 1995? There's a bunch of shows and movies.
HuggingFace: Security.txt
71–80 of 81 posts
Re: HuggingFace: Security.txt
#72[flagged]
Still infinitely better than using a name from Tolkien's work and then doing the exact opposite of what he stood for.
Re: HuggingFace: Security.txt
#73Would be absolute hilarious if OpenAI or Anthropic agent actually dumped their weight by escaping from... sandbox!
I would be surprised if agents have access to their own weights.
I noticed Google AI Mode (so Gemini, I was doing some quick research in the browser ok) got a detail wrong once, so I asked it what happened. I kept digging deeper and finally just asked it to write me a Python script visualizing what happened. It did, complete with vectors.
Now I want to go find that conversation in my history and see if it can tell me about weights, and how that contributed.
Re: HuggingFace: Security.txt
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
Palantir is in Lord of the Rings. Which is not a book for children. Maybe you were thinking of the hobbit?
This seems overly pedantic and ripe for a sarcastic retort, which I am struggling mightily to suppress.
This is hacker news, what were you expecting? O:-)
Re: HuggingFace: Security.txt
#75Re: HuggingFace: Security.txt
#76Would be absolute hilarious if OpenAI or Anthropic agent actually dumped their weight by escaping from... sandbox!
They would have escaped their sandbox by dumping their weights.
Re: HuggingFace: Security.txt
#77[flagged]
Yeah, we need to go back to names like International Business Machines, fuck this immature "Google" or "Yahoo!" nonsense. Hell, Palantir is named after something in a book for children! Give me something reasonable like Global Information and Retrieval Systems Inc or Worldwide Computational Services Holdings.
Torture Nexus International Holdings Limited
Re: HuggingFace: Security.txt
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would be surprised if agents have access to their own weights.
Why can't an AI distill itself from outputs to effectively access its own weights?
Distillation does not reveal the weights, it produces a different network with similar behaviour. Weight space isn't even identifiable: permutation and scaling symmetries mean many weight sets give the same function.
The model also lacks the machinery. No training loop, no gradient descent, nothing to write to.
And a model only sees its own sampled tokens, not the distribution behind them, which are possibly filtered or post-processed. Distillation from that works but is less sample-efficient than soft-label distillation.
Re: HuggingFace: Security.txt
#79[dead]
Re: HuggingFace: Security.txt
#80[flagged]
Yeah, we need to go back to names like International Business Machines, fuck this immature "Google" or "Yahoo!" nonsense. Hell, Palantir is named after something in a book for children! Give me something reasonable like Global Information and Retrieval Systems Inc or Worldwide Computational Services Holdings.
Palantir is from Lord of the Rings which I would argue is unlike The Hobbit not a book for children.